A forum for those current students who are or may be transferring from one school to another. Post any questions, advice, or other transfer related comments here.

Forum rulesAnonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only available to the creator of each thread. The anonymous posting feature is intended to permit the solicitation of anonymous advice regarding the transfer application process, chances of being accepted, etc. Unacceptable uses include: testing the feature, questions which are clearly fake or hypothetical in nature, harassing other users, etc. Posters should also read and understand the announcements posted at the top of the Transfers forum prior to using the anonymous feature.

I am a current 1L at Stanford, but will have to move to the east coast for personal reasons for the coming year. Does anyone have an idea how difficult it will be to transfer from Stanford to Harvard or Yale? I think my grades are somewhere around median, but there is no way to be sure.

Thanks for your help.

EDIT: For those just skimming, here is the relevant info for the poll:

-Stanford 1L-~Median grades

Last edited by PA102 on Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:59 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Although you are obviously in the best position (school-wise) to transfer to either H or Y, the conventional wisdom on this board is that you still need at least top 30% for a lateral transfer. Of course, this may not apply to transfers between HYS, which is in a league of its own really. IMO, proving yourself a competent SLS student + a good reason to transfer to the east coast will give you a reasonable chance at getting in H. (H accepts ~100 transfers, whereas Y accepts <20 IIRC.)

Harvard had 39 students transfer in last year, Yale had 15, and Stanford had 16, according to their data on LSAC. I'd have to guess that none get 100% matriculation, especially taking into account the probability of cross-admits between them.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to guess that Harvard takes ~ 50-60, Yale takes 20-25, and Stanford takes 20-25. Still a long-shot, but not quite as bleak as originally stated.

mscarn23 wrote:Harvard had 39 students transfer in last year, Yale had 15, and Stanford had 16, according to their data on LSAC. I'd have to guess that none get 100% matriculation, especially taking into account the probability of cross-admits between them.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to guess that Harvard takes ~ 50-60, Yale takes 20-25, and Stanford takes 20-25. Still a long-shot, but not quite as bleak as originally stated.

LSAC school profiles show transfer numbers from 2 years ago (current 3L's) fwiw

mscarn23 wrote:Harvard had 39 students transfer in last year, Yale had 15, and Stanford had 16, according to their data on LSAC. I'd have to guess that none get 100% matriculation, especially taking into account the probability of cross-admits between them.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to guess that Harvard takes ~ 50-60, Yale takes 20-25, and Stanford takes 20-25. Still a long-shot, but not quite as bleak as originally stated.

Harvard took 29 transfers last summer, not 39. And the ratio of offer:accept is likely very close to 1:1, under the circumstances. Yale is likely even closer to 1:1, and from what I understood, they took 10-12 transfers last summer, and that's it.

I don't mean to make anything sound bleak. OP should certainly go for it. I just don't want to see that much misinformation put out there.

Do schools really care if your reason is "compelling"? If so, which of the following reasons are compelling?

1) want to go to "better" school2) want better shot at "big law"3) want better shot at clerkships4) want smaller class sizes5) want better shot at becoming academic6) want to cross-enroll in other classes at school7) want to be closer to family8. want to be closer to family and family member dying9) want to be closer to significant other10) want to be closer to finance11) want to be closer to significant other of >5 years12) want to be closer to spouse13) want to go to university where went as an undergrad14) want to go to university where family members went15) want to practice in vicinity of new school

saladfiend wrote:Do schools really care if your reason is "compelling"? If so, which of the following reasons are compelling?

1) want to go to "better" school2) want better shot at "big law"3) want better shot at clerkships4) want smaller class sizes5) want better shot at becoming academic6) want to cross-enroll in other classes at school7) want to be closer to family8. want to be closer to family and family member dying9) want to be closer to significant other10) want to be closer to finance11) want to be closer to significant other of >5 years12) want to be closer to spouse13) want to go to university where went as an undergrad14) want to go to university where family members went15) want to practice in vicinity of new school

this is a great question. i can't think of why a school would care other than 1) knowing you'll come if admitted, 2) knowing you're not a frivolous person who jumps from thing to thing or place to place. someone should drop some knowledge on this.

saladfiend wrote:1) want to go to "better" school - not compelling2) want better shot at "big law" - not really compelling3) want better shot at clerkships - not really compelling4) want smaller class sizes - compelling5) want better shot at becoming academic - not really compelling6) want to cross-enroll in other classes at school - compelling7) want to be closer to family - compelling8. want to be closer to family and family member dying - compelling9) want to be closer to significant other - compelling10) want to be closer to finance - compelling11) want to be closer to significant other of >5 years - compelling12) want to be closer to spouse - compelling13) want to go to university where went as an undergrad - could be compelling14) want to go to university where family members went - could be compelling15) want to practice in vicinity of new school - compelling

This is just my take on it. It seems that geographic and family reasons are "compelling" and that rank-whoring or anything that could be construed as rank whoring is "not compelling" (unless you can specifically tie in demonstrable goals with specific programs that the law school has to offer). I think it's silly and arbitrary as well.

Yes, if you have a compelling reason to make a geographic relocation, it can make a real difference. The two types of transfers that appear successful are "has the grades" and "has compelling geographic/personal reasons".

By "compelling" I don't mean "changed your mind after 1L and want to be elsewhere", just so that's clear.

Can anybody give some input on the potential drawbacks of transferring in my case?

I know the typically cited drawbacks include: difficulty meeting professors to get meaningful LORs in limited time, losing the previous network, etc.

If I were to transfer to H, for example, would I really be losing a network, or simply gaining another? My reasons for transferring are not related to "prestige whoring," and I know some transfer students are concerned with the "why did you transfer" question. Do these concerns simply not apply for me? Would I still be given the "network" (or opportunities that are derivative of the network) of a H student who attended since 1L?

PA102 wrote:Can anybody give some input on the potential drawbacks of transferring in my case?

I know the typically cited drawbacks include: difficulty meeting professors to get meaningful LORs in limited time, losing the previous network, etc.

If I were to transfer to H, for example, would I really be losing a network, or simply gaining another? My reasons for transferring are not related to "prestige whoring," and I know some transfer students are concerned with the "why did you transfer" question. Do these concerns simply not apply for me? Would I still be given the "network" (or opportunities that are derivative of the network) of a H student who attended since 1L?

Thanks

I know a law professor who transferred from SLS to HLS due to personal reasons. He mentioned that, while he still got a COA clerkship, the connections he lost probably prevented him from getting a SCOTUS clerkship.

PA102 wrote:Can anybody give some input on the potential drawbacks of transferring in my case?

I know the typically cited drawbacks include: difficulty meeting professors to get meaningful LORs in limited time, losing the previous network, etc.

If I were to transfer to H, for example, would I really be losing a network, or simply gaining another? My reasons for transferring are not related to "prestige whoring," and I know some transfer students are concerned with the "why did you transfer" question. Do these concerns simply not apply for me? Would I still be given the "network" (or opportunities that are derivative of the network) of a H student who attended since 1L?

Thanks

I know a law professor who transferred from SLS to HLS due to personal reasons. He mentioned that, while he still got a COA clerkship, the connections he lost probably prevented him from getting a SCOTUS clerkship.

This is interesting, Helmholtz. Is this a result of (weak) professor recommendations? If so, do you think this is because of this particular student's lack of face-time with his LOR writers and thus more due to the class size than transferring in general? Plus, due to the class size at HLS, isn't it mostly the name that assists your career endeavors?

Also, is it the consensus that transferring is this detrimental to post-graduate opportunities? I plan to be very involved, and would thus probably make connections with professors/classmates. Will I be as disadvantaged as the professor mentioned above?

PA102 wrote:Can anybody give some input on the potential drawbacks of transferring in my case?

I know the typically cited drawbacks include: difficulty meeting professors to get meaningful LORs in limited time, losing the previous network, etc.

If I were to transfer to H, for example, would I really be losing a network, or simply gaining another? My reasons for transferring are not related to "prestige whoring," and I know some transfer students are concerned with the "why did you transfer" question. Do these concerns simply not apply for me? Would I still be given the "network" (or opportunities that are derivative of the network) of a H student who attended since 1L?

Thanks

I know a law professor who transferred from SLS to HLS due to personal reasons. He mentioned that, while he still got a COA clerkship, the connections he lost probably prevented him from getting a SCOTUS clerkship.

This is interesting, Helmholtz. Is this a result of (weak) professor recommendations? If so, do you think this is because of this particular student's lack of face-time with his LOR writers and thus more due to the class size than transferring in general? Plus, due to the class size at HLS, isn't it mostly the name that assists your career endeavors?

I believe it had to do with lack of face time with his LOR writers, more so than class size. He's very smart and very personable, so I don't believe that any difficulties could be chalked up this prof's shortcomings. It also might have had to do with the fact that I don't think he was on HLS LR, and law review would have been much more difficult to attain at Harvard (considering the fact that you're a transfer and that SLS has 45 LR spots for such a small class), but I can't say for certain. SLS, HLS, and a Supreme Court clerkship aer low down on my list of concerns, so we didn't go too in-depth in the conversation.

I should also note the obvious: this person is now a prof at one of the best law schools in America; we should all be so disadvantaged